Good amicus curiae briefs—supposedly “friend-of-the court” briefs—can impact the court’s decision-making process, either with respect to the outcome of the case or the rationale expressed by the court for reaching that outcome. Yet appellate judges and appellate practitioners complain that, all too often, amicus briefs bring nothing new or of value to the court and instead merely reiterate the arguments advanced by one of the actual parties to the appeal. Those briefs are not truly amicus briefs and, unfortunately, they cause courts to be wary of the value of the amicus brief, even though—when properly written—it can be the court’s best friend in reaching the right decision.
We will begin this Article by discussing amicus briefs in general and the specific use of them in the United States Supreme Court. We will then explore the Florida experience with amicus briefs, both by examining Florida decisional law and by reflecting on interviews with Florida appellate judges and practitioners. We will conclude by considering the possible need for changes in the Florida rule on amicus briefs.